Hunters Keep Breaking Laws

November 19, 1989|By JAY MUNDY Staff Writer

Food for thought was gleaned recently from an article appearing in the fall issue of the Virginia Game Warden Association's magazine.

Game wardens from throughout the U.S. and Canada met in Washington, D.C., this summer to discuss many of the problems facing wildlife law enforcement. Dave Hall, a special agent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Dr. Robert Jackson of the University of Wisconsin made public a two-year study they did on poaching and the results may surprise you.

In the study, 600 waterfowl hunters were observed from spy blinds. Following the observations, 472 of the 600 hunters were interviewed in their homes.

Waterfowl hunters were targeted for the study because the researchers consider duck hunting the toughest assignment a warden can draw. Dr. Jackson was quoted as saying, "It takes time. It takes skill. And it is physically demanding to make a good case."

The study results show:

Thirty percent violated a game law during the observed hunt.

Eighty-five percent admitted to intentional or accidental violations when asked in the post-season interview, "Do you ever violate game laws?"

And 46 percent said they would intentionally violate.

The graduates of hunter safety programs are more likely to violate a game law.

Violators are most likely to live within 25 miles of their hunting sites.

The biggest percentage of violators were in their 20s. Those in their 30s were second, followed by teenagers.

Members of sportsmen's clubs are more likely to commit ethical violations than hunters who are non-members.

Members of Ducks Unlimited are more likely to violate game laws than non-members.

Duck hunters are more likely to violate the law when they're hunting in a party of three or more than either alone or with a partner. An exception that Dr. Jackson noted was the hunter with a really good dog violated less.

Shocking?

Dr. Jackson said hunter ethics and hunter responsibility are the most critical problems facing today's sportsmen.

Did the two reseachers find a solution?

Hunters and wardens agreed that for a deterrent to be effective, state wildlife officers are going to have to get tough. Confiscation of hunting equipment ranked at the top of the list.

"There's not only the financial value of their equipment, but a sentimental value," Dr. Jackson said.

Revocation of hunting licenses and privileges is another.

"Violators also feel they have a right to violate because other people are killing over their limit, or breaking other laws, and getting away with it, so why not," said agent Hall.

Hall said it was important not to let the violator escape going to court.

"Missing work, finding a parking place at the courthouse, being there with drug dealers and other people in leg irons, and standing before the judge with everyone watching leaves an impression," he said.

Interviews with violators also suggest the following as strong deterrents:

(1) Better training in hunting skills, including both shooting and species identification. (2) Publication in local papers of the names of violators and their crime. (3) Active involvement of hunters in wildlife management activities. (4) Tough, innovative sentencing.